NORTHERN TERRITORY, Australia, May 12, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - An Australian woman who was declared brain dead regained consciousness after weeks of fighting doctor recommendations that her ventilator be shut off, according to a report in the Northern Territory News yesterday.

Fifty-six-year-old Gloria Cruz was rushed to Royal Darwin Hospital in the Northern Territory of Australia on March 7, after having a stroke in her sleep.

When a CAT scan revealed that Cruz was most likely suffering from a brain tumor, she underwent surgery in what initially appeared to be an unsuccessful attempt to save her life.

“The moment I saw my wife in the ICU I thought I’d collapse,” Glorias husband, Tani Cruz said, according to Northern Territory News. “I couldn’t believe that I was looking at the woman I have loved for 27 years. She was not my wife. Her face was swollen. Her hair was gone. Tubes were inserted in her mouth. There was a tube in the top of her head. Another in her hands. And she was lying almost lifelessly.”

Doctors told Mr. Cruz that his wife would die within 48 hours, calling her situation hopeless. They recommended that the ventilator that was keeping her breathing be removed.

While Cruz stalled the decision, he was contacted by a social worker and a patient advocate who urged him to remove the ventilator and allow his wife to die.

I told him that God knows how much I love her - that I don’t want her to suffer but I don’t want her to leave us,” Cruz said. Im a Catholic  I believe in miracles.

After two weeks, he allowed them to shut off the ventilator, but insisted that a breathing tube be inserted in her mouth so that she could continue breathing on her own.

Three days later, Gloria Cruz defied the medical experts and woke from her coma. According to her husband, she is now alert, mobile, and on her way to recovery.

“We have a strong faith and always believed that God would help us, said Cruz.

An increasing number of experts have begun calling into question the “brain death” criteria for determining death. They argue that brain death is an arbitrary set of criteria developed largely to ensure the usability of organs harvested from such patients, as well as to decrease the medical costs involved in keeping “brain dead” patients alive on life support.

A number of incidents have seemed to confirm this view, including one particularly chilling case in which a young man declared “brain dead” actually heard doctors discussing harvesting his organs. Minutes before being wheeled into the operating room to have his organs removed, he woke up.

A pro-life group (the name escapes me) has some literature making the case that organs must be harvested from a living person. Once a person is declared “brain dead” the organs can then be harvested while the rest of the body is still alive, giving the hospital valuable organs.

Not to hijack the thread but I remember during that time even 'friends' argued with me about her "quality" of life. I couldn't believe it. Here this woman was being murdered, in front of the entire nation, and people were actually debating about it. Unbelievable.

Regarding this woman, I'm so sure the staff was very 'gentle' in encouraging the husband to finish his wife off. /s Thank God he didn't listen.

You're basically correct, the term "brain death" was originated by organ harvesters as an excuse to be able to take organs from a living person. It's really nothing more than an excuse to kill the living.

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/braindeath/index?tab=articles

10
posted on 05/13/2011 11:22:05 AM PDT
by wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)

An increasing number of experts have begun calling into question the brain death criteria for determining death. They argue that brain death is an arbitrary set of criteria developed largely to ensure the usability of organs harvested from such patients, as well as to decrease the medical costs involved in keeping brain dead patients alive on life support.

I have read about this ..they decide they want the healthy organs from someone with a serious injury ..they do minimal or no surgery and come to the family to ask for the organs. I have not and will not ever sign a release for my organs.. it is like signing a death certificate for yourself if you are ever critically ill

"Quality of life" is a VERY RELATIVE term, its meaning changes from person-to-person and it even changes for the individual on a regular basis.

Unfortunately, the term is consistently used by the culture of death as an excuse to kill people. They say things like, "The quality of life in parts of Africa is so bad that it would be better if these people were never born."

I have a fairly high standard of living personally; I wouldn't want to live the way I know many less fortunate people live, but that DOES NOT MEAN that I don't want them to live or that I wouldn't want to live if I was in their shoes.

18
posted on 05/13/2011 11:32:07 AM PDT
by wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)

That is not the way it read to me. The first sentence of the post (#5) was what I based the ‘advocating’ on. If they aren’t endorsing it and are simply trying to show the insidiousness of the label of “brain dead”, then it is of course a positive thing.

Her brain wasnt just injured, it was essentially mush, if you recall the autopsy findings.

Yes, thirteen days without hydration will almost certainly destroy a person's brain.

Since you weren't here while Terri was being murdered (or maybe you were) perhaps you can enlighten us. Terri was first hospitalized in 1990, after an operation she started rehabilitation and was getting better (she could sit up and swallow on her own). Then she became rich and her "husband" decided to kill her off. What criteria exists for brain death where a person is CONSCIOUS?

Why did her "husband" first try to help her and later decide to kill her?

Be sure to provide FACTS, because we have a lot of them.

20
posted on 05/13/2011 11:40:31 AM PDT
by wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)

That is not the way it read to me. The first sentence of the post (#5) was what I based the advocating on. If they arent endorsing it and are simply trying to show the insidiousness of the label of brain dead, then it is of course a positive thing.

I think the confusion was in the wording that Spudx7 used, I am not aware of any pro-life groups that support live organ harvesting and most are very hesitant about organ donation to begin with because of the ethical issues.

I will NEVER sign an organ donor card, though I have no problems with someone having my organs once I'm ACTUALLY DEAD.

21
posted on 05/13/2011 11:44:16 AM PDT
by wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)

The first sentence is so poorly written, it makes it sound like the comatose woman was fighting with the doctors instead of her husband.

Anyways, I have a cousin who recovered from a long coma, and she is now happily married with children. This is one of the reasons I won’t check the organ donor card, because I think that motivates the hospitals to encourage even more strongly for life support to be removed in situations like this. They only harvest organs from people who are still alive, which is why they need this “brain dead” category to justify what they are doing.

“making the case that organs must be harvested from a living person...”

Yes, I think this is correct. Within minutes the heart stops beating, the body’s cell release their digestive enzymes and start breaking themselves down, and I don’t think that process can be reversed once it has started.

Of course it is a very “relative” term but when used in westernized nations, particularly in the U.S. it is generally being used by someone that has made the God-like judgement that the patient will never function normally (by our society’s definition); contribute to or pursue life fully. Therefore they are better off dead.

Terri Schiavo was murdered, not because of the quality of her life though, that term and brain death were cleverly used to appease onlookers. Something drove that murderous husband of hers to wipe her off the face of the planet. IIRC the details surrounding her condition and how it happened were very suspect along with the fact that another woman was involved with him. I don’t remember if there was insurance money involved (maybe you remember that WB) but there was more to the story then what we will ever know imo.

The horrifying thing is that it was allowed by the state (sanctioned murder); especially horrifying since her family was willing to be the main caregiver.

Sorry for the confusing wording, it was a brochure showing the dark side of organ harvesting. My time at the computer is very limited and is spent with a wiggling baby on my lap, so I type as quickly as possible.

Sorry for the confusing wording, it was a brochure showing the dark side of organ harvesting. My time at the computer is very limited and is spent with a wiggling baby on my lap, so I type as quickly as possible.

No problem, I was almost positive that's what you meant.

30
posted on 05/13/2011 12:31:56 PM PDT
by wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)

Mikey originally supported Terri (see the old newspaper article I posted in post #20); however, as soon as she was awarded a lot of money (most of which was supposed to go to her rehabilitation), he "remembered" a conversation where she said she would want to die.

He spent all of her money killing her.

Nobody will ever know what exactly happened to her the night of her original accident. What we do know is that she WAS NOT bulimic, she DID NOT drink several gallons of iced tea, but her "husband" WAS VERY ANGRY that she had spent a lot of money getting her hair done that day.

We also know that her "husband" refused to divorce her even though he had children with another woman and we know that his parents died in a manner similar to Terri>

32
posted on 05/13/2011 12:37:18 PM PDT
by wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)

Ahh yes, now I remember. Thank you. I just remember feeling helpless and somewhat overwhelmed at the reaction of some people I knew. Of course many felt the way we did...that it was a televised murder.

At the time, Fox News was showing clips, provided by the family, that clearly showed Terri ‘responding’ to certain things. She clearly was cognizant/aware (perhaps limited but since she couldn’t speak we can’t know to what degree) Of course the normal parade of ‘experts’ were filed out and ‘interviewed’ stating that everything was more or less ‘reflex’ and strongly disputed that what we saw was actually a response to anything.

My SIL has me as her health proxy (or whatever that’s called) if she is on life support she knows I’ll pull the plug - because she knows my brother won’t - I haven’t the heart to tell her I won’t pull the plug either :>)

While Terri was being tortured to death, Mikey and his pals had a pizza party in her hospital room. The bastards propped their feet up on her bed and ate while she was struggling to breathe. (And if anyone thinks that is made up to make Mikey seem worse than he is, he actually wrote about it in his book.)

39
posted on 05/13/2011 1:24:03 PM PDT
by wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)

I am 100% convinced that Terri's murder was a "test run" for American death panels, to that end the public was constantly bombarded with various experts and non-stop polling was done to determine which lines of BS were being believed.

40
posted on 05/13/2011 1:38:42 PM PDT
by wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)

... and non-stop polling was done to determine which lines of BS were being believed.

Exactly. The feelers were out to find out what would work. Because we are such a hedonistic society now, the 'quality of life' smoke screen was the winner.

A substantial portion of the American public weighed in in favor of 'killing' her because they couldn't imagine having to care for a life that was simply a life; a life that couldn't contribute, couldn't pursue dreams, couldn't lust etc etc. They were deceived because each of us has the fear of "being a burden" on our loved ones and the fear of being dependent (which is my fear as well). So, in that context, her murder was acceptable. Of course this is imho only, but after speaking with many people, I'm convinced that is how it was viewed by many.

I absolutely agree with you. I call them the “clipboard crew” who roam around hospital corridors waiting for a diagnosis of “brain dead” so they can talk the grieving relatives into giving up their loved one’s organs.

I recall the autopsy findings. There was nothing in there about her brain being mush. Even though Thogmartin made his pro-death views widely known, even he agreed that she was alive and had some brain function. So please explain how you could possibly know he was wrong.

Terri’s SPECIAL DAY. Thank you for finding this. Back in the day, we had some super duper death trolls who denied that Terri had any special days. Terri actually had more than one special day. They were held by cities or by the places who rehabbed her. She was doing remarkably well until the slug-bottom dweller of a spouse cut off all therapy and the Pinellas Judge were good with that cuz they’re evil republican sob’s.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.